Would you be ok if next gen consoles started pricing games at 70+ USD?

[adang92]

No I would be disappointed

Developing games for ps4/xbox one is not that different from next gen and advancing tech is helping the process of game development

Don't give AAA companies excuses to be more greedy

2k ****ed it for everybody, people will eat up 2k21's increased prices cuz of the Kobe cover

[BigElephant]

2k ****ed it for everybody, people will eat up 2k21's increased prices cuz of the Kobe cover

Truth, and every other company is going to follow suit.

[bemyguest]

Games should be priced accordingly to their length and gameplay IMO.

Resident Evil 3 -> Gameplay 6/10, length is literally 5 hours and the game is priced at £50 fuking lmao.

Sport games like FIFA and NBA have pretty huge fanbase and replayability I guess, so of course the fanboys gonna pay whatever price they put. Plus I feel like everyone that is into sport games, they only play sport games (same idea as with Apple bandwagon). Personally, I wouldn't pay a £30 for any of these.

IMO if a game has at least +30 hours of gameplay and it is enjoyable, then yeah I guess it's fine to put £50 tag but now every game has that price so it is annoying lol.

Also I rent my PS4 games so I don't pay full price for any of them but I just can't fanthom how someone can put a price tag like that on any sh*tty game.

[MrMummyou]

Believe it or not,
in my country current gen games are 90$.

[BigElephant]

Games should be priced accordingly to their length and gameplay IMO.

Resident Evil 3 -> Gameplay 6/10, length is literally 5 hours and the game is priced at £50 fuking lmao.

Sport games like FIFA and NBA have pretty huge fanbase and replayability I guess, so of course the fanboys gonna pay whatever price they put. Plus I feel like everyone that is into sport games, they only play sport games (same idea as with Apple bandwagon). Personally, I wouldn't pay a £30 for any of these.

IMO if a game has at least +30 hours of gameplay and it is enjoyable, then yeah I guess it's fine to put £50 tag but now every game has that price so it is annoying lol.

Also I rent my PS4 games so I don't pay full price for any of them but I just can't fanthom how someone can put a price tag like that on any sh*tty game.

Pretty much how I feel. I play sports games but I don't buy the new one every year. I get a ton of play time out of Franchise/Dynasty/Association mode. I'll also pay full price for multiplayer games that I'll get a lot of time out of. I also don't like Premium passes but I've bought them for every Battlefield except for BFV. But I got 1200 hours out of BF3, 1500 hours out of BF4, and 300 hours out of BF1 so I'm not too pissed about buying premium for those games. Best bang for the buck for any game I've played though is PVZ Garden Warfare 2. I paid for the deluxe edition upgrade which was only $10 to get access to two new characters and a new ability. They sold upgrades for other characters that were added into the game but those were also unlockable by grinding so I just got them that way. I got 2500 hours out of that game and I still play it like 5 days a week.

[rocketfish]

this is bullchit. Games are not devoid of content. The DLC and Micro trans are extra things if you want more, but I've never seen a base game that was somehow incomplete.


And even this WAS true, its fair because with inflation they are selling the base game for about $15-$20 LESS than before

100% wrong, games come incomplete all the time, what should have been in is considered DLC. don't play yourself

[BigBallsMcgee]

100% wrong, games come incomplete all the time, what should have been in is considered DLC. don't play yourself

Never bought a single dlc and never once did I feel a game was somehow incomplete

[BigBallsMcgee]

Games should be priced accordingly to their length and gameplay IMO.

Resident Evil 3 -> Gameplay 6/10, length is literally 5 hours and the game is priced at £50 fuking lmao.

Sport games like FIFA and NBA have pretty huge fanbase and replayability I guess, so of course the fanboys gonna pay whatever price they put. Plus I feel like everyone that is into sport games, they only play sport games (same idea as with Apple bandwagon). Personally, I wouldn't pay a £30 for any of these.

IMO if a game has at least +30 hours of gameplay and it is enjoyable, then yeah I guess it's fine to put £50 tag but now every game has that price so it is annoying lol.

Also I rent my PS4 games so I don't pay full price for any of them but I just can't fanthom how someone can put a price tag like that on any sh*tty game.

This makes sense, but then it will just encourage padding to extend game length in the name of price

Gameplay is subjective so cant be part of the criteria

[eod8989]

Games now days aren't worth that much. They should be $40 considering 99% of them have no replay value or fun factor and they charge you extra for micro transactions anyways

[bartosh]

I'm perfectly fine with games going even higher than 70. Games have cost 60 for like 2 decades now and the sale prices haven't risen with inflation at all


I'll pay $100 easily for a 10/10 game like mario odyssey or witcher3. I won't buy a game that isn't worth full price regardless of a $60 or $120 price tag. I'll buy 2-3 games a year full price and rest just wait for the goty bargain bin version a year later for $20-30

[Ravishing_Rick]

never
60 is limit for a must buy

[FawkinJuicy]

I honestly don't remember the last time I paid $60 for a game... I don't know if I ever have. Even when I have bought new releases, I had something like the Best Buy club (GCU?) that knocked it down to $48. I'm willing to wait to for prices to go down to play most games.

[Smithers115]

i havent spent that much on a game since i had a console

[VTheKing]

Tbh, I'd be fine with it.

The sticker price has remained unchanged for a long while, but publishers have responded by inserting microtransactions, gambling and trickling of DLCs. People end up paying way more than the $60 more often than not. Not to mention the developers being increasingly sucked dry for their labour since the break-even point requires more and more sold copies.

Better to pay more for a better product upfront than to be baited into spending way more than the original price.

[bongowongo]

Tbh, I'd be fine with it.

The sticker price has remained unchanged for a long while, but publishers have responded by inserting microtransactions, gambling and trickling of DLCs. People end up paying way more than the $60 more often than not. Not to mention the developers being increasingly sucked dry for their labour since the break-even point requires more and more sold copies.

Better to pay more for a better product upfront than to be baited into spending way more than the original price.

Yeah, but jacking up prices isnt gonna make MTX or DLC go away forever. Not since dev's have found what a good revenue source it is. If anything it seems like chasing the Triple A model where everything has to be bigger, bigger, and look nicer has led to a unsustainable level where you get people being forced to crunch and burnout.


If anything, with the prike hike, I hope this forces more and more dev's to enter the AA space and create much more focused games that aren't focusing on being big for the sake of being big and bloated just so that they can artificially expand the games length like Ubisoft etc. Lot of great titles from obsidian, larian and other smaller studios that focus on smaller games without the whole "AAA" experience.

I'm not sure where Arkane studios falls into this as I feel like they're games tend to be much more focused and smaller ... Would Dishonored/Prey be considered AAA games?

[WHChampion]

I bought my first game with my own money at age 11 with my "allowance" for chores and whatever. FFVII. It was $55 after taxes. Remember it vividly; 23 years ago.

I am super surprised games only rose ~$10 in 25 years. $50 in 1997 is basically $80 today counting inflation.

So, yes I'm okay with $70. But I (almost) always wait for discounts anyway.

I'm not really surprised they haven't risen.

Games generate insane money now due to microtransactions. Also takes much longer to go "out of print" due to digital storefronts. Can sometimes even resell the game multiple times through remasters.

A lot of the most popular games are f2p so if they started asking for too much money people will just be like naw I'll stick with league/fortnite/apex/etc.

It's funny seeing sports games being the ones to push a price increase considering they're always the pioneers in squeezing customers for their chitty, copy pasted games. brb online passes. brb stat boost microtransactions.

[i3oosted]

Would pay $70 if I didn’t have to bang trannies or sign a BLM contract in every game.

[BigBallsMcgee]

never
60 is limit for a must buy

who was inflation

[AD117]

Absolutely not. Fuk them. I don't give a fuk if devs never see their families, they better bust arse as mules to keep my games cheap.

60 dollars isn't even fkn cheap

Especially not with todays DLC practices and microtransactions.

70 dollars (75 with tax)? Suck my balls.

who was inflation

As if that chit isn't more than accounted for through microtransactions and DLC. GTFO with that iNfLaTiOn bullchit

[Kabamaro]

Adjusting for inflation isn't greed. Based on inflation games should be priced higher than $70.

Games take a lot more money and time to make now than in the past. The notion that its cheaper to develop games is totally false.

Lol @ inflating video games while we’re experiencing one of the biggest recessions since the Great Depression

[freeburn]

They should be getting cheaper if we are going to digital, not the other way around. But hey what choice do we even have as consumers honestly aside to wait for a sale if we don't wanna pay that price

[BigBallsMcgee]

As if that chit isn't more than accounted for through microtransactions and DLC. GTFO with that iNfLaTiOn bullchit

It definitely isnt accounted for with dlc. I've never bought a single DLC, all I've been doing is buying base games.

Those games are more complex and often longer than games of the past. Yet effectively with the inflation the price is almost $20 LESS than when the price originally moved to $60.

So many morons dont understand inflation. Or you make up thos fantasy world where base games arent "complete ". Wtf games are you buying? I just played the last of us 2, how is that not a full game..if anything it's too long.

[BigBallsMcgee]

Lol @ inflating video games while we’re experiencing one of the biggest recessions since the Great Depression

Holy s*it srs? We're not inflating games, inflation has already happened and games are 15 years behind. Raising prices would just effectively put them back to the price they were 15 years ago.

You morons need a course on basic economics

[JewishSuperHero]

I've only bought one game at full price this generation and like 3 or 4 in the last generation. If they go up to $70 I probably wouldn't buy any at full price in the next generation.

[WHChampion]

It definitely isnt accounted for with dlc. I've never bought a single DLC, all I've been doing is buying base games.

Those games are more complex and often longer than games of the past. Yet effectively with the inflation the price is almost $20 LESS than when the price originally moved to $60.

So many morons dont understand inflation. Or you make up thos fantasy world where base games arent "complete ". Wtf games are you buying? I just played the last of us 2, how is that not a full game..if anything it's too long.

Microtransactions bring in literally billions of dollars.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/25/ultim...fifa-10461286/
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/06/rocks...-dlc-10527500/

[BigBallsMcgee]

Microtransactions bring in literally billions of dollars.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/25/ultim...fifa-10461286/
https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/06/rocks...-dlc-10527500/

thats in addition to the base games. That doesnt mean the base games should be $20 cheaper than they were before.

And not every game even has microtransactions or dlc anyway. you picked out the biggest two games, the vast majority are not making that much from add ons. And even if they were, that still doesnt mean the core game should be less than it was 15 years ago

[DoragonKingu]

I would gladly pay $70 if all the expansion packs would be included and the pay to win markets were removed. All features, items, and skins would be free and unlockable at different levels.

[WHChampion]

thats in addition to the base games. That doesnt mean the base games should be $20 cheaper than they were before.

And not every game even has microtransactions or dlc anyway. you picked out the biggest two games, the vast majority are not making that much from add ons. And even if they were, that still doesnt mean the core game should be less than it was 15 years ago

Most games have some kind of DLC now when almost 0 had any 15-20 years ago.

Digital stores cuts production costs and keeps the game available for much longer which didn't happen in the past.

The industry is absolutely booming and they don't need to increase the price for any reason other than GREED.

Pissening that NBA 2k21 is using Kobe's death to try and increase game prices on their copy pasted, microtransaction filled chit game.

[MoeBettuh]

I don’t ****ing care. I only play a handful of games overall, so an extra $10 every like year that I actually buy a game? NBD.

[BigBallsMcgee]

Most games have some kind of DLC now when almost 0 had any 15-20 years ago.

Digital stores cuts production costs and keeps the game available for much longer which didn't happen in the past.

The industry is absolutely booming and they don't need to increase the price for any reason other than GREED.

Pissening that NBA 2k21 is using Kobe's death to try and increase game prices on their copy pasted, microtransaction filled chit game.

for the last time, they are not increasing the price. The price has gone DOWN over the years due to inflation. They are just putting prices back to where they've been historically by adjusting for inflation.